Rice v. Norfolk & W. Ry. Co.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
In Error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of Ohio.
1Opinion of the Court
RICHARDS, Circuit Judge.
The validity of the claim sued on in this case depends upon the construction of section 3300 of the Revised Statutes of Ohio of 1892, regulating the purchase by a railroad company of a line of road of another company, continuous or connected, but not competing.
The suit was brought by the plaintiff in error, Samuel E. Rice, against the Norfolk & Western Railway Company, on a contract made by Rice with the Cincinnati, Portsmouth & Virginia Railroad Company, the predecessor of the Norfolk & Western Railway Company, by which Rice agreed to purchase and operate a stone…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Shields v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Railroad Co. v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1879
- Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co. v. HamSupreme Court of the United States · 1885
- Berry v. Kansas CitySupreme Court of Kansas · 1894
- Montgomery & West Point Railroad v. BoringSupreme Court of Georgia · 1874
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- E. E. Taenzer & Co. v. Chicago, R. I. & P. R.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1909
- Adelbert College of Western Reserve University v. Wabash R.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1909